Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Comment Re:The common "Embrace Extend Extinguish" .... (Score 1) 131

There was a time when MS could rely on mindshare and being the de facto standard. But these days, is that still the case? Why would a start-up go with an MS based solution today? 100% of the software they'd need to get started is free as beer, and free as in freedom to boot. Of course, some of the big consulting firms are still heavily invested, but for how much longer?

So yeah, maybe you're right. It's not about EEE anymore. They're just getting desperate.

Comment Re:Oh the Irony..... (Score 1) 735

> This isn't some political comedy movie where the bumbling doofus finds himself in power by hilarious circumstance

Well, that movie played out quite well for Bush the 2nd.
Also, think about all those who profit from the clowns in power. What would The Daily Show be without Bush and Trump?

Comment Re:Ummmm.. no (Score 1) 109

An edit to the /etc/hosts file would be a much cheaper fix for you. Works on all major OS, including Android. An of course, works regardless of where you connect.

You'd have to update it from time to time, however once every two/three years is more than enough in my experience. Or you could be fancy, and do a cron-job.

Comment Re:Will not buy TLC NAND (Score 1) 61

This pictures illustrates it clearly:
And Wikipedia goes into more detail:

SLC - Single Level Cell = 1 bit (2 states), most robust
MLC - Multi Level Cell = (typically) 2 bits (4 states), ~1/10 of the lifespan of SLC
TLC - Triple Level Cell = 3 bits (8 states), ~1/10 of the lifespan of MLC

Comment Re:Building a censorship infrastructure (Score 1) 205

Maybe that's where we disagree. I believe the government, ISPs should not have the ability by law nor technical means, regardless of how easy or complex it is to implement, to censor any traffic on the Internet. (Of course, some internal ISP admin will always be able to cause damage, but he will then be committing a crime, like any other cracker).

Furthermore, I vehemently oppose any moral judgment, moral policing, and censorship. The pixels on my screen do not inconvenience anybody, so I should be free to color them whatever way I please.

Finally, I believe so called decency laws is the hubris of a free society. If naked skin or people holding hands, kissing (regardless of gender) offends anybody, they are free to look the other way. On the Internet, I don't even have to do that, I can simply avoid the sites I don't like. And if anybody wants to "protect the children" from seeing skin-tone pixels, I'm sure there's an app for that. Protecting people from actual violent crime should not start with censorship.

Comment Re:Building a censorship infrastructure (Score 3, Informative) 205

The slippery slope here is not that people will stop thinking, observing, or even protesting. Rather, it's that with the laws and infrastructure in place, it becomes very easy to block more pages. So rather than a uncontrolled "slippery slope", maybe it should just be called a "first step" or sure tell-tale sign.

That idea is not based on some illogical extrapolation into the future, but on a number of examples from the past: Many European countries have already followed this pattern, some of which you'd think be among the most liberal: Holland, Denmark, France, Germany, UK. Take UK as a prime example: First they put in place the infrastructure because of child porn. Then it's used against "hate speech" or "terrorism". Next violent porn, BDSM. After that, file sharing sites, The Pirate Bay. Next, political party sites like The Pirate Party, and the Chaos Computer Club. The latter two have already been "mistakenly" blocked in multiple countries.

Now, many people believe the state should not be in the business of policing the Internet. So in the UK, they've made the brilliant move of making it "voluntarily". All the major ISPs now have personal filters controlled by their customers. Of course, it'd be a bit naive to think that those settings could not be used against you: If you ever find yourself in a sexual abuse case, Child Protection Services case, background check / government security clearance, you'd better have those settings in the right position.

Comment Re:Deserves the protection of law and order? (Score 4, Interesting) 80

I recommend the book "Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces" by Radley Balko. It goes into detail on why and how we got the police we have today. It's not a coincidence and it's not about "a few bad apples".

Since the 1960s, there has been a systematic top-down development towards a more violent, heavier armed and more excessive police force. This has been achieved through government grants, incentives, and case-law favoring and encouraging the police behavior we see today. No-knock raids gone wrong where innocent people get hurt is now a regular occurrence. Forfeiture without a court charge is a major source of income for all law agencies, to the tune of billions a year. The wars on abstracts (drugs, crime, terror) has made our society more violent and less safe.

If we continue down this path, the next step will be the people having to defend themselves against their government and police.

Comment Re:Deserves the protection of law and order? (Score 2) 80

Although it is true that power corrupts, and that "the new boss is the same as the old", there are just as many or more examples throughout history where resistance and revolution did change things in a positive direction. To take a few examples close to home: the American revolution and later the civil war, universal suffrage, black's rights, gay's rights. The list goes on.

If you lean back, hide, and let the powerful get what they want then they will corrupt. That will most certainly lead to a net negative for society as a whole. You might live a comfortable life, but you will die a coward.

Besides the eternal class struggle you mentioned, today's fight is about a free society vs. total corporate and government power, and there are many fronts. Some examples, in random order: Never-ending wars on abstracts (drugs, crime, terrorism); excessive military spending; Internet communication, privacy and freedom of expression; copyright vs. cultural heritage; government transparency vs. secrecy; police abuse, cops-gone-bad, no-knock raids.

It is of course ironic how the latter problem is more or less the same as where we started, with "writs of assistance" before the Revolution. So yes, I guess it's moving slowing, but overall we are moving in a positive direction.

Slashdot Top Deals

"One day I woke up and discovered that I was in love with tripe." -- Tom Anderson